Contingency Fee - Judgments

Jun 26 1987 (FN)

Pennsylvania Vs. Valley Citizens' Council

Court: US Supreme Court

Decided on: Jun-26-1987

..... several additional reasons as to why it is necessary to increase the lodestar figure for contingent fee cases and concluded that rather than compensating lawyers for unsuccessful claims an adjustment of the ..... faced by a lawyer paid promptly as litigation progresses see clermont currivan improving on the contingent fee 63 cornell l rev 529 556 557 561 566 1978 schwartz mitchell an economic analysis .....

Tag this Judgment! Ask ChatGPT

Jun 24 1992 (FN)

Burlington Vs. Dague

Court: US Supreme Court

Decided on: Jun-24-1992

..... two claims one with underlying merit of 20 the other of 80 absent any contingency enhancement a contingent fee attorney would prefer to take the latter since he is four times more likely ..... the lodestar amount by 25 on the grounds that respondents attorneys were retained on a contingent fee basis and that without such enhancement respondents would have faced substantial difficulties in obtaining .....

Tag this Judgment! Ask ChatGPT

May 28 2002 (FN)

Gisbrecht Vs. Barnhart

Court: US Supreme Court

Decided on: May-28-2002

..... prohibit or discourage attorneys and claimants from entering into contingent fee agreements ibid given the prevalence of contingent fee agreements between attorneys and social security claimants it is ..... and something quite irrational to look at the consequences of a contingent fee agreement after the contingencies have been resolved and proclaim those consequences unreasonable because the attorney .....

Tag this Judgment! Ask ChatGPT

May 28 1985 (FN)

Zauderer Vs. Office of Disc. Counsel

Court: US Supreme Court

Decided on: May-28-1985

..... state interest the court held that disclosure requirements applicable to advertisements mentioning contingent fee arrangements served the permissible goal of ensuring that potential clients were not ..... preventing consumer deception could more effectively be achieved through direct regulation of contingent fee agreements themselves rather than through compelled disclosures in advertising brief for .....

Tag this Judgment! Ask ChatGPT

Feb 21 1989 (FN)

Blanchard Vs. Bergeron

Court: US Supreme Court

Decided on: Feb-21-1989

..... award the court of appeals however reduced the award because petitioner had entered into a contingent fee arrangement with his lawyer footnote 3 under which the attorney was to receive 40 of ..... followed in cases where the prevailing party and his or her attorney have executed a contingent fee agreement to the contrary in hensley and in subsequent cases we have adopted the lodestar .....

Tag this Judgment! Ask ChatGPT

Apr 18 1990 (FN)

Venegas Vs. Mitchell

Court: US Supreme Court

Decided on: Apr-18-1990

..... propositions to the conclusion that 1988 also requires the district court to invalidate a contingent fee agreement arrived at privately between attorney and client we have never held that 1988 ..... section 1988 itself does not interfere with the enforceability of a contingent fee contract venegas also argues that even if contingent fees exceeding statutory awards are not prohibited per se by 1988 .....

Tag this Judgment! Ask ChatGPT

Jan 24 2005 (FN)

Commissioner Vs. Banks

Court: US Supreme Court

Decided on: Jan-24-2005

..... not already earned vested or even relatively certain to be paid when the contingent fee contract was made a contingent fee arrangement the court reasoned is more like a partial assignment of income ..... the claimant likely could not prevail on these premises respondents urge us to treat a contingent fee agreement as establishing for tax purposes something like a joint venture or partnership in .....

Tag this Judgment! Ask ChatGPT

Jun 27 1988 (FN)

Pierce Vs. Underwood

Court: US Supreme Court

Decided on: Jun-27-1988

..... reason for exceeding the statutory cap this issue is quite different from the question of contingent fee enhancement that we faced last term in pennsylvania v delaware valley citizens council for clean ..... purpose in providing for reimbursement in a very small category of cases to subsidize all contingent fee litigation with the united states we conclude therefore that none of the reasons relied upon .....

Tag this Judgment! Ask ChatGPT

Feb 05 1945 (FN)

Muschany Vs. United States

Court: US Supreme Court

Decided on: Feb-05-1945

..... to a payment by the government to him as its agent contingent fee contracts to secure government business for the employer of the ..... a would be contractor has hired a third person on a contingent fee basis to procure for the former a contract with the ..... legislation to that effect in reaching the foregoing conclusion on the contingent fee aspect of the problem we laid aside consideration from the .....

Tag this Judgment! Ask ChatGPT

Mar 21 1984 (FN)

Blum Vs. Stenson

Court: US Supreme Court

Decided on: Mar-21-1984

..... adjustment to compensate for the risk of nonpayment under 1988 is entirely unrelated to the contingent fee arrangements that are typical in plaintiffs tort representation in tort suits an attorney might ..... 6 1976 h r rep no 94 1558 p 9 1976 contingency adjustments under 1988 should not be confused with contingency fee arrangements that are commonly entered into by private attorneys representing .....

Tag this Judgment! Ask ChatGPT

Contingency Fee - Judgment Search Results